I see no reason why certain aspects of "creationism" and evolution need be mutually exclusive. The dicotomny is political, not scientific.
Let me give you an example: The theory of Evolution depends on the existance of random mutations. Proving the actual existence of genuine "randomness" is VERY Difficult. We have faith that certain phenomena are "random", because they seem to be on the scales we are familiar with. However, in fact, may be no such thing as actual randomness,...we cannot know randomness empirically, and there is no theoretical test that always works on every scale.
Some folks have faith in the theory of evolution as generally taught, and others perfer to place their faith elsewhere
We BELIEVE that random mutation fuels evolution. But there may be a pattern in the mutations too subtle for us to see. ....I.E. not random at all, but designed by something, someone. I do not feel there is iron-clad evidence one way or the other.
However, evolution theory does generate testable hypotheses, within certain parameters. While intelligent design produces fewer, if any, testable hypotheses, so far. I am not convinced that intelligent design can never produce a testable hypothesis